13:57:20 RRSAgent has joined #sparql
13:57:20 logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/06/23-sparql-irc
13:57:22 RRSAgent, make logs world
13:57:22 Zakim has joined #sparql
13:57:24 Zakim, this will be 77277
13:57:24 ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 3 minutes
13:57:25 Meeting: SPARQL Working Group Teleconference
13:57:25 Date: 23 June 2009
13:57:29 zakim, this will be SPARQL
13:57:29 ok, LeeF; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 3 minutes
13:57:43 Chair: AxelPolleres
13:57:53 dialing
13:57:58 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2009-06-23
13:58:12 bglimm has joined #SPARQL
13:58:38 SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has now started
13:58:42 +Lee_Feigenbaum
13:58:46 + +539149aaaa - is perhaps AxelPolleres?
13:58:56 +kasei
13:59:01 Zakim, mute me
13:59:01 kasei should now be muted
13:59:14 +??P9
13:59:17 zakim, ??P9 is me
13:59:17 +AndyS; got it
13:59:18 +cory
13:59:24 +bglimm
13:59:29 Zakim, aaaa is me
13:59:29 sorry, AxelPolleres, I do not recognize a party named 'aaaa'
13:59:32 Zakim, mute me
13:59:32 bglimm should now be muted
13:59:42 ivan has joined #sparql
13:59:51 Zakim, +539149aaaa is me
13:59:51 sorry, AxelPolleres, I do not recognize a party named '+539149aaaa'
14:00:01 Zakim, who is on the phone
14:00:01 I don't understand 'who is on the phone', AxelPolleres
14:00:12 zakim, dial ivan-voip
14:00:12 ok, ivan; the call is being made
14:00:13 zakim, 539149aaaa is AxelPolleres
14:00:14 sorry, LeeF, I do not recognize a party named '539149aaaa'
14:00:16 +Ivan
14:00:21 zakim, who's on the phone?
14:00:21 On the phone I see AxelPolleres?, Lee_Feigenbaum, kasei (muted), AndyS, cory, bglimm (muted), Ivan
14:00:23 + +1.919.663.aabb
14:00:32 Prateek has joined #sparql
14:00:32 zakim, AxelPolleres? is definitely AxelPolleres
14:00:33 I don't understand you, LeeF
14:00:36 SteveH_ has joined #sparql
14:00:37 zakim, AxelPolleres? is AxelPolleres
14:00:43 +AxelPolleres; got it
14:00:58 john-l has joined #sparql
14:01:32 zakim, aabb is SimonKJ
14:01:32 +SimonKJ; got it
14:01:47 zakim, cory is temporarily Prateek
14:01:47 +Prateek; got it
14:02:14 +john-l
14:02:29 +??P30
14:02:49 Zakim, ??P30 is [Garlik]
14:02:51 probably...
14:02:58 +[Garlik]; got it
14:03:06 LukeWM has joined #sparql
14:03:09 Zakim, [Garlik] has SteveH_ and LukeWM
14:03:22 +SteveH_, LukeWM; got it
14:03:36 + +01212803aacc
14:03:36 Scribenick: John
14:03:38 Simon: I'm the primary IBM representative.
14:03:42 Scribenick: john-l
14:04:06 ... I've been working in the Rational group, on a new RDF-based platform, for 4 years.
14:04:24 + +2
14:04:42 ... We rely heavily on SPARQL, and are very interested in standardizing useful new features as a result.
14:04:51 +pgearon
14:04:59 pgearon has joined #sparql
14:05:07 ... We are primarily interested in aggregates, and in updates (in the longer term).
14:05:07 Zakim +01212803 is me
14:05:11 (probably)
14:05:22 zakim, 01212803 is iv_an_ru
14:05:22 sorry, LeeF, I do not recognize a party named '01212803'
14:05:24 zakim, +01212803 is iv_an_ru
14:05:24 +iv_an_ru; got it
14:06:17 http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2009-06-23
14:06:22 zakim, who's on the phone?
14:06:22 On the phone I see AxelPolleres, Lee_Feigenbaum, kasei (muted), AndyS, Prateek, bglimm (muted), Ivan, SimonKJ, john-l, [Garlik], iv_an_ru, +2, pgearon
14:06:24 [Garlik] has SteveH_, LukeWM
14:07:05 http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-06-16
14:07:33 RESOLVED: Accept last week's minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-06-16
14:07:54 regrets for next week, will be at a Dagstuhl workshop
14:08:09 LeeF: Kjetil can probably scribe next week.
14:08:25 AxelPolleres: Anything new with our liasons?
14:08:27 q+
14:08:42 ack ivan
14:08:48 ivan: OWL 2 is now in CR.
14:09:13 LeeF: That includes rdf:text?
14:09:16 ivan: Yes.
14:09:19 rdf:text is now rdf:PlainLiteral in OWL 2
14:09:38 thanks, bglimm, i couldn't remember what the new name was :)
14:10:04 ???: We now have a chair for the RDB2RDF WG.
14:10:13 s/???/Ivan/
14:10:14 s/???/ivan/
14:10:17 ??? = ivan
14:10:57 http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/actions/open
14:11:18 AxelPolleres: Can we close any of these actions?
14:11:45 LeeF: I need to swap back in to work on action 16.
14:11:54 Zakim, who is on the phone
14:11:54 I don't understand 'who is on the phone', AxelPolleres
14:12:03 Zakim, who is on the phone?
14:12:03 On the phone I see AxelPolleres, Lee_Feigenbaum, kasei (muted), AndyS, Prateek, bglimm (muted), Ivan, SimonKJ, john-l, [Garlik], iv_an_ru, KjetilK, pgearon
14:12:06 Zakim, who is on the phone?
14:12:06 [Garlik] has SteveH_, LukeWM
14:12:08 On the phone I see AxelPolleres, Lee_Feigenbaum, kasei (muted), AndyS, Prateek, bglimm (muted), Ivan, SimonKJ, john-l, [Garlik], iv_an_ru, KjetilK, pgearon
14:12:10 [Garlik] has SteveH_, LukeWM
14:12:52 Sorry, phone troubles again.
14:13:32 trackbot, close ACTION-42
14:13:32 ACTION-42 Ask team contacts whether http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql-features/ is ok closed
14:14:30 ACTION-44: see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009AprJun/0392.html
14:14:30 ACTION-44 Mail NOT EXISTS example. notes added
14:14:37 trackbot, close ACTION-44
14:14:37 ACTION-44 Mail NOT EXISTS example. closed
14:14:46 I would like to consider action 40 closed!
14:15:07 AxelPolleres: We had two F&R questions: first, the short name for the document.
14:15:40 ivan: We need to ask the domain admin for a green light on the desired short name.
14:16:32 The group discusses whether we need SPARQL versioning in the short name.
14:16:58 http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-06-16#resolution_2
14:17:22 ACTION: Ivan to request sparql-features as short name from Thomas R
14:17:22 Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - Ivan
14:17:22 Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. ivan, imikhail)
14:17:31 ACTION: Mr. Herman to request sparql-features as short name from Thomas R
14:17:31 Sorry, couldn't find user - Mr.
14:17:32 And the group confirms that we already resolved to go with "sparql-features" as the short name.
14:17:36 ACTION: Ivan Herman to request sparql-features as short name from Thomas R
14:17:36 Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - Ivan
14:17:36 Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. ivan, imikhail)
14:17:40 ACTION: Herman to request sparql-features as short name from Thomas R
14:17:40 Created ACTION-48 - Request sparql-features as short name from Thomas R [on Ivan Herman - due 2009-06-30].
14:18:31 chimezie has joined #sparql
14:18:58 +Chimezie_Ogbuji
14:19:33 chimezie: I haven't been able to review the F&R yet.
14:20:03 AxelPolleres: I think the remaining issues with the F&R document are small.
14:20:11 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009AprJun/0400.html
14:20:47 q+ to talk about very confusing CONSTRUCT example in subselect section
14:21:20 SteveH_: The CONSTRUCT example is not germane and confusing.
14:21:26 We agreed not to use it last week didn't we?
14:21:33 I thought so
14:21:57 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009AprJun/0398.html 2.4.3
14:22:18 SteveH_: In section 2.4.3.
14:22:35 LeeF: I also agree with striking that example.
14:22:39 -iv_an_ru
14:22:43 lternatively, analogously to the SELECT example from before, we can use a subquery with project expressions for this query
14:22:45 (oops)
14:23:08 http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/features/#Project_expressions_syntax
14:23:32 suggestion is to remove first CONSTRUCT example
14:23:49 LeeF: I think including it in the document at this point goes too far.
14:23:58 PROPOSED: remove all below "To return an RDF graph..." in section 2.4.3
14:24:29 Remove just example "CONSTRUCT { ?x foaf:name { fn:string-join(?gn, " ", ?sn) } }
14:24:29 "
14:25:48 I don't like syntax of CONSTRUCT { ?x foaf:name { fn:string-join(?gn, " ", ?sn) } } but I'd keep it.
14:26:25 (we have CONSTRUCT { ?x foaf:name ` fn:string-join(?gn, " ", ?sn) ` } , maybe not the best variant too)
14:26:27 AxelPolleres: We need to remove the offending example and tweak the words to match.
14:26:45 "To return an RDF graph where the first and family names are concatenated to a full name such project expressions could be used"
14:26:49 suggestion ^
14:27:27 AxelPolleres: Any objections?
14:27:53 PROPOSED: reword to "To return an RDF graph where the first and family names are concatenated to a full name such project expressions could be used" and remove first COPNSTRUCT example in 2.4.3
14:28:07 RESOLVED: reword to "To return an RDF graph where the first and family names are concatenated to a full name such project expressions could be used" and remove first COPNSTRUCT example in 2.4.3
14:28:19 It is "advice to the editors" isn't it?
14:28:29 yes
14:28:57 AxelPolleres: We've already taken care of 1 and 2 from the 8 points.
14:29:33 http://esw.w3.org/topic/SPARQL/Extensions/Aggregates
14:29:49 http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:AggregateFunctions#Existing_Implementation.28s.29
14:30:03 AxelPolleres: We should take the list of implementors of aggregate expressions from the ESW wiki.
14:30:24 http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:ProjectExpressions#Existing_Implementation.28s.29
14:30:37 SteveH has joined #sparql
14:30:48 AxelPolleres: Take the existing lists from other pages and paste them into the document.
14:31:34 without the CONSTRUCT case (it's about being concise and focued on select expressions)
14:31:35 ivan: What policy should we have for adding implementations? Should we try to be exhaustive?
14:31:54 "The following non-exhaustive list includes some systems addressing this feature"
14:32:04 s/ivan/Kjetil/
14:32:26 I share some of Kjetil's concerns
14:32:56 The document will be dated, I don't see the problem
14:33:04 Better to include implementations purely as examples, rather than try to make a comprehensive list
14:33:05 Not exhaustive - but the charter talsk about common extensions and experience which is relevant.
14:33:13 +1 to LeeF
14:33:16 No need to be exaustive, if we're in ;)
14:33:18 yes, not exhastive
14:33:26 what iv_an_ru says is exactly the problem :/
14:33:34 this isn't an Implementation Report
14:34:14 I'd choose two implementations per feature, using "similarity to the spec" as a criterion.
14:34:19 AxelPolleres: Would anyone object to having a non-exhaustive implementation list?
14:34:54 iv_an_ru: there is no spec at this point
14:34:58 KjetilK: I object; I'm concerned about the persistence of the URIs.
14:35:29 q+
14:35:33 q-
14:35:37 Yes
14:35:41 q+
14:35:45 well, what we've specified fo "approximate" syntax and semantics resembles a spec.
14:35:47 I'd like to see the list left
14:35:48 q- SteveH_
14:36:45 "The following non-exhaustive list includes some systems addressing this feature at the date of publication of the present document"
14:36:49 ivan: The text needs to make it clear that the implementation list could rapidly become out-of-date.
14:37:16 ... Also, it needs to emphasize that an up-to-date list *is* maintained on the Wiki.
14:38:05 I don't feel that the document stands on it's own sufficiently if it requires liks to the WG wiki
14:38:11 to justify itsself
14:38:14 Link to which wiki? ESW presumably since it outlives the WG wiki?
14:38:17 +1
14:38:38 +1 for ESW
14:38:54 +1, I also think the docs lifetime is similar to the WGs
14:38:55 AndyS: I think the F&R doc only has a limited span of usefulness, so I don't worry about the deep future so much.
14:39:11 q+
14:39:33 AndyS: I would put the links in.
14:39:44 +1
14:39:44 ack me
14:39:52 We are required to have: "shown to exist in multiple, interoperable implementations" so useful info towards that
14:39:53 ack ivan
14:39:55 ack me
14:40:12 q+
14:40:46 LukeWM: Do we still need complex use-cases, with more than one feature, for the F&R?
14:40:53 http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/FRUseCases
14:41:47 Pretty sure it wasn't me requesting them :-D
14:42:01 AxelPolleres: Is there any objection to going to FPWD without the list of complex use-cases?
14:42:08 sorry LeeF, you're right, it wasn't
14:42:13 PROPOSED: go to FPWD without list of use cases
14:42:23 +1
14:43:06 proposal needs rewording!
14:43:09 indeed
14:43:37 RESOLVED: go to FPWD without list of use cases
14:43:51 Yes, I wasn't seconding that we can go to publication, only that I'm happy not to have the use cases
14:43:51 er?
14:44:29 Intent of the previous resolution is to assert that the group does not wish to wait on complex use cases before publishing FPWD, it is NOT a resolution to publish a document.
14:44:42 nor was it a resolution
14:44:46 AxelPolleres: We discussed the modeling of UNSAID without an actual negation feature in SPARQL 1.0 on the mailing list.
14:45:09 SteveH: I think we can continue with the feature described as is.
14:45:31 4) in my mail, doesn't need a todo.
14:46:31 AxelPolleres: #5 is just a typo.
14:48:19 SteveH: Adding the TODO to address #6 is fine.
14:50:04 AxelPolleres: I suggest no changes to the doc in response to #7.
14:50:20 q+
14:50:52 ack SimonKJ
14:51:07 SimonKJ: We also support a protocol update, and I'll try to dig out a reference.
14:51:24 IBM's Jazz Foundation supports graph update via a RESTful protocol
14:51:30 I'll try and find a persistent reference
14:51:54 AxelPolleres: I suggest adding references to these existing implementations to the list for emphasis.
14:52:24 AxelPolleres: Is there anything else that would prevent going to FPWD?
14:52:36 +1
14:52:48 ..to ivan
14:52:57 ivan: I think we should make all the above changes and then make a decision.
14:52:58 too many changes to do conditionally, I thi nk
14:53:03 s/thi nk/think
14:53:07 I agree with Ivan
14:53:45 AndyS_ has joined #sparql
14:53:59 It's FPWD - can be a bit rough. Early is good. "It's agree to publish" not "agree with every detail"
14:54:30 LeeF: Let's make the changes, then at the beginning of the next meeting determine if there is any outstanding hesitation.
14:54:38 AxelPolleres: It'll also be good to have outstanding reviews completed.
14:54:38 q+
14:54:45 ack AndyS
14:55:13 my action is still open too, for some reason http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/actions/40
14:55:13 AndyS: Make changes and have reviews?
14:55:30 trackbot, close ACTION-40
14:55:30 ACTION-40 Review F&R document closed
14:55:37